There's been a lot of talk lately about NFTs (non-fungible tokens) and the art world. In this post I'll share some preliminary thinking and some resources in case you're researching the topic.
The basic concept has been around for a few years, but it has been in the news after an image by "Beeple" (the social-media moniker of Mike Winkelmann) was auctioned for $69 million at Christies, making his work the third highest price auction result by a living artist.
Below is a good introduction of the phenomenon on NPR's "Planet Money" podcast.
Basically the idea is that you can take a digital file, such as a JPEG, a movie file—or even a tweet—and assign it a unique code verified by the blockchain.
A collector can purchase and own that file, even though it doesn't exist as a tangible object. The file itself can still be copied indefinitely by other people, and the buyer isn't necessarily receiving any reproduction rights, just bragging rights that they own this digital entity.
This creates a new way for artists to offer their work to collectors, but it has many other implications. One is that you can grant token-holders access to certain clubs or events, and in this way you can build a following.
Here's Beeple again explaining his artwork and how he got where he is. He works with 3D programs to create digital art of surrealistic, topical ideas, and he's been doing a new image every day for about 13 years.
But the backers are sophisticated people who recognize that there's something truly revolutionary emerging that will trickle down to most artists in the future.
Does it make sense for every artist to leap into NFTs right now? I don't think it make sense for me—not yet anyway, until there's a better solution to the environmental issues.
To some marketers this might appear to be a quick way to make a buck. There's a gold rush feeling to the market for NFTs, and there's already a lot of junk appearing, such as toilet-paper NFTs and potato-chip NFTs. Do such offerings have any real market value, and if so, will they hold their value?
Keep in mind that minting an image as an NFT doesn't automatically add value to it. And be aware that many of the NFT marketplaces charge minting fees, buyers' fees, and seller's commissions. So getting into this field isn't free.
What the technology promises is not only that fans can support artists and own a piece of what they create, but there can be new ways to build a loyal following, something akin to Patreon. I would regard this as a potentially new career direction for some artists, particularly digital artists. Many of the same principles to building an art career still apply: namely that we would need to develop a long-range strategy for this, rather than doing it as a one-off.
And there are environmental costs. There's a lot of concern surrounding the carbon footprint of NFTs, because the blockchain draws a very large amount of electrical power to encrypt the code.
This online essay "The Unreasonable Ecological Cost of #CryptoArt" makes an effort to quantify the environmental effect of a typical NFT work. It has a serious carbon footprint at every stage of the process, from minting to reselling. Some NFT artists have bought carbon offsets to try to mitigate the backlash.
Where is this all headed? Beeple shares some of his long-range thinking in Kara Swisher's interview on the podcast Sway: "What the Heck are NFTs? Let's Ask Beeple." One of the things he's working on is to make actual, physical embodiments of his digital paintings so that the buyers feel they're getting something they can hold in their hands.
Some recent auction offerings by other artists have included both the original painting and the NFT at the same time. There also have been NFT drops of art created by a robot. We're in a disruptive phase with new paradigms emerging. The New York Times says it's neither a miracle nor a scam.
In the comments, I welcome your insights, thoughts, and links. If you've had a good or bad experience creating an NFT, please share.
تعليقات
إرسال تعليق